Who gave you the best Batman and Joker feel?

[Knight Rise]

In the end, both voice and physical, which set of actors really gave you a good Batman and Joker combination?

[Knight Rise]

I think for me it was Conroy and Hamill

[BatBat]

Conroy and Hamill. Hands down! Batman Arkham Asylum wouldn't have been near as good without those two voicing. And imo that's the best portrayal of Batman and Joker I've ever seen.

[Godzilla2014]

Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. They had the most interesting Batman/Joker relationship. Neither will kill the other, Batman because he doesn't want to give Joker the satisfaction, and Joker because Batman is too fun for him to deal with, ripped straight from The Killing Joke. Not to mention that Ledger's Joker wanted Batman to execute him because it would corrupt him.

[Knight Rise]

Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. They had the most interesting Batman/Joker relationship. Neither will kill the other, Batman because he doesn't want to give Joker the satisfaction, and Joker because Batman is too fun for him to deal with, ripped straight from The Killing Joke. Not to mention that Ledger's Joker wanted Batman to execute him because it would corrupt him.

Well, that was in Batman: Arkham Asylum. He gives Batman a wide open shot to kill him, but he knows already he wouldn't do it and laughs at him. He even says "I want you to catch me, just not yet!"

[Godzilla2014]

Well, that was in Batman: Arkham Asylum. He gives Batman a wide open shot to kill him, but he knows already he wouldn't do it and laughs at him. He even says "I want you to catch me, just not yet!"

But even in Batman: Arkham Asylum, I don't think he actually wanted Batman to go through with it, he just knew that Batman wouldn't.

[Knight Rise]

Oh I'm sure he did. Arkham Asylum is linked off of the comics which also includes "The Killing Joke", in which Joker doesn't understand why Batman isn't mad like him. He wants him to do it because he gets overjoyed when he sees Batman tempted to do it. So he just pushes it further and further hoping one day he'll snap

[Godzilla2014]

Oh I'm sure he did. Arkham Asylum is linked off of the comics which also includes "The Killing Joke", in which Joker doesn't understand why Batman isn't mad like him. He wants him to do it because he gets overjoyed when he sees Batman tempted to do it. So he just pushes it further and further hoping one day he'll snap

Ok. Heath Ledger's Joker was still more terrifying than Mark Hamill's Joker was. Plus, Ledger's Joker did more damage to Bale's Batman in The Dark Knight than Hamill's Joker did to Conroy's Batman in Batman: The Animated Series, The New Batman Adventures, Justice League, Justice League Unlimited TV series (and other affiliated media), and the Batman: Arkham Asylum video game. Only in Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker did he do comparable damage to Batman, and that was in flashback, and he died shortly afterward.

[The Joker]

Bale and Ledger and Conroy and Hamill.

Nicholson and Keaton only shared one scene together as Batman and Joker and it was Batman being all angry at him for killing his parents. That's not the nature of their relationship at all.

[Godzilla2014]

Bale and Ledger and Conroy and Hamill.

Nicholson and Keaton only shared one scene together as Batman and Joker and it was Batman being all angry at him for killing his parents. That's not the nature of their relationship at all.

Actually, I think they had at least two scenes together, but they only fought once as Batman and Joker. Other than that, I agree.

[Knight Rise]

Ok. Heath Ledger's Joker was still more terrifying than Mark Hamill's Joker was. Plus, Ledger's Joker did more damage to Bale's Batman in The Dark Knight than Hamill's Joker did to Conroy's Batman in Batman: The Animated Series, The New Batman Adventures, Justice League, Justice League Unlimited TV series (and other affiliated media), and the Batman: Arkham Asylum video game. Only in Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker did he do comparable damage to Batman, and that was in flashback, and he died shortly afterward.

In YOUR opinion. I personally would feel more terrified being attacked by Hamills Joker especially after Batman Beyond when he's choking Terry and telling him to laugh it up. Just gives me more of a chill than Heaths. It's also your opinion to say Ledger did more damage to Batman when that's completely incomparable since they are 2 different things. So you stick with what you think, I'll stick with mine. Kapeesh?

[Fudgie]

Ledger and Bale. Nailed it.

[Godzilla2014]

In YOUR opinion. I personally would feel more terrified being attacked by Hamills Joker especially after Batman Beyond when he's choking Terry and telling him to laugh it up. Just gives me more of a chill than Heaths. It's also your opinion to say Ledger did more damage to Batman when that's completely incomparable since they are 2 different things. So you stick with what you think, I'll stick with mine. Kapeesh?

First off, the whole point of the thread is based on opinions. Second, Ledger's Joker has already killed Rachel Dawes (and several other officials), corrupted Harvey Dent, set in motion a course of events that have cost Harvey Dent his life and Batman his reputation, and he's alive, so that may not be the end of it. Hamill's Joker tortured Tim Drake into giving up Batman's secrets, brainwashed him into being his sidekick, and then got killed by the little Joker Jr. That was most of the damage Hamill's Joker ever did to Conroy's Batman over a course of about 19 or 20 years at this point, while Ledger's Joker did all the aforementioned damage to Bale's Batman in a single film. Quite frankly, when Hamill's Joker dares Conroy's Batman to kill him in Arkham Asylum, there's not very much he has done to deserve it any more than other Batman villains. When Ledger's Joker dared Batman to kill him in The Dark Knight, a part of me really understood why he just might do it, why Bale's Batman might make an exception for him. I can't say that for Hamill's Joker in most of his appearances.

Ledger and Bale. Nailed it.

Agreed.

[Knight Rise]

You took one performance out of the many Hamill has done? Wow just.....wow

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

Tough to say. Out of the big three, I'd say Keaton and Nicholson are the weakest. Not a whole lot of interaction and it becomes a revenge story towards the end. Conroy and Hamill have a much larger history together as their characters; pretty much from point A to Z. Bale and Ledger had the best material out of all to work with.

For me, Bale is Batman and Ledger is the Joker. Their story feels more personal and at the same time, Batman doesn't lose focus that he is first and foremost a crime fighter, not a man with a vendetta. Bale and Ledger get the vote.

[Godzilla2014]

You took one performance out of the many Hamill has done? Wow just.....wow

Which one do you mean? The Arkham Asylum example you brought up or Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker? Do you agree with my analysis of Mark Hamill's Joker tempting Kevin Conroy's Batman to kill him in Batman: Arkham Asylum against Heath Ledger's Joker tempting Christian Bale's Batman to kill him in The Dark Knight?

Tough to say. Out of the big three, I'd say Keaton and Nicholson are the weakest. Not a whole lot of interaction and it becomes a revenge story towards the end. Conroy and Hamill have a much larger history together as their characters; pretty much from point A to Z. Bale and Ledger had the best material out of all to work with.

For me, Bale is Batman and Ledger is the Joker. Their story feels more personal and at the same time, Batman doesn't lose focus that he is first and foremost a crime fighter, not a man with a vendetta. Bale and Ledger get the vote.

Agreed.

[The Joker]

You took one performance out of the many Hamill has done? Wow just.....wow

What is your problem? Are you so insecure about anyone preferring anything better than BTAS?

Some people think Daniel Craig is a better Bond than all the others who's done more performances than him. If that's what they like best then fair play to them. There's probably going to be people who are going to like Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man more than Tobey's three performances in the movies. Again so what if they do?

Quality is subjective. Godzilla2014, take no notice of him.

[Knight Rise]

No he's just using bad examples. Chill the hell out

[Majik1387]

Keaton, Conroy, Hamill, and Ledger.

[Godzilla2014]

What is your problem? Are you so insecure about anyone preferring anything better than BTAS?

Some people think Daniel Craig is a better Bond than all the others who's done more performances than him. If that's what they like best then fair play to them. There's probably going to be people who are going to like Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man more than Tobey's three performances in the movies. Again so what if they do?

Quality is subjective. Godzilla2014, take no notice of him.

Thank you. B:TAS is great, but it's not the end all, be all. Christian Bale is Batman to me, and I can't imagine who will fill his boots when he's done. Some, like Marx, prefer Michael Keaton. Others will prefer Bale's successor. But will I, at the very least, give the next series a chance? You bet your ass I will.

No he's just using bad examples. Chill the hell out

What bad example?

[IndyJokerJones]

Bale/Ledger and Conroy/Hamill are tied for me. Conroy and Hamill just have such a long run together and there's just so many wonderful moments in their time together that is just not comparable to anything else, times that show these two know each other like nobody else. Bale and Ledger though are just two titans and Gotham is their playground. Ledger waits until the mobs controlling the city are desperate enough to give the power to him and then he throws it back in their faces like a pie, now that's a joke. Bale however doesn't even take revenge after Rachel dies and Harvey is maimed, he takes the high road and continues to thwart the Joker. You can really tell that they are "destined to do this forever" as opposite sides of the same coin.

[Godzilla2014]

Bale/Ledger and Conroy/Hamill are tied for me. Conroy and Hamill just have such a long run together and there's just so many wonderful moments in their time together that is just not comparable to anything else, times that show these two know each other like nobody else. Bale and Ledger though are just two titans and Gotham is their playground. Ledger waits until the mobs controlling the city are desperate enough to give the power to him and then he throws it back in their faces like a pie, now that's a joke. Bale however doesn't even take revenge after Rachel dies and Harvey is maimed, he takes the high road and continues to thwart the Joker. You can really tell that they are "destined to do this forever" as opposite sides of the same coin.

Exactly.

[EliteF50]

Conroy and Hamill.

People are seriously voting for Bale/Ledger? They barely had any chemistry/screen time together.

[EliteF50]

First off, the whole point of the thread is based on opinions. Second, Ledger's Joker has already killed Rachel Dawes (and several other officials), corrupted Harvey Dent, set in motion a course of events that have cost Harvey Dent his life and Batman his reputation, and he's alive, so that may not be the end of it. Hamill's Joker tortured Tim Drake into giving up Batman's secrets, brainwashed him into being his sidekick, and then got killed by the little Joker Jr. That was most of the damage Hamill's Joker ever did to Conroy's Batman over a course of about 19 or 20 years at this point, while Ledger's Joker did all the aforementioned damage to Bale's Batman in a single film. Quite frankly, when Hamill's Joker dares Conroy's Batman to kill him in Arkham Asylum, there's not very much he has done to deserve it any more than other Batman villains. When Ledger's Joker dared Batman to kill him in The Dark Knight, a part of me really understood why he just might do it, why Bale's Batman might make an exception for him. I can't say that for Hamill's Joker in most of his appearances.

You do realize BTAS/TNBA/BB/JLA/JL/etc was supposed to be for kids, right? Of course they couldn't as gruesome as TDK. You can get away with a lot more in live action than you can in animation.

That being said, Hamill's Joker is much more terrifying and a larger threat, imo.

[IndyJokerJones]

People are seriously voting for Bale/Ledger? They barely had any chemistry/screen time together.

What movie were you watching? Besides, if you look at all of the BtAS episodes exactly how much time do Batman and Joker spend on screen together per episode? Maybe 5 minutes, most of the episode is Joker doing stuff while Batman is trying to find him. Even in Mask of the Phantasm they aren't on screen together until the last 20 minutes.

As for chemistry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohU16OiduUs

[Fudgie]

What movie were you watching? Besides, if you look at all of the BtAS episodes exactly how much time do Batman and Joker spend on screen together per episode? Maybe 5 minutes, most of the episode is Joker doing stuff while Batman is trying to find him. Even in Mask of the Phantasm they aren't on screen together until the last 20 minutes.

As for chemistry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohU16OiduUs

Fact :up:

[Mister Meddle]

Keaton/Nicholson and Conroy/Hamill will always have a place in my heart (not like that). All four men are responsible for the way I view both Batman and the Joker to this very day because I grew up enjoying their performances. I really enjoyed Ledger's Joker and I believe he deserves to be aligned with Nicholson and Hamill. However the same can't be said about Bale. The ball goes to Conroy for being well rounded and for being the official voice of Batman for decades. The ball is shared with Keaton for playing a dark yet intimidating Batman while maintaining an appropriate tone for live action. Christian Bale did a fantastic job as Bruce Wayne however I care more about his primary identity, Batman. He might not be aligned with Keaton and Conroy but he was better than the rest (West, Kilmer, Clooney, etc.).

As for the campy 60's show, I didn't care for the show when I was a kid because it was the opposite of what I grew up with. Nowadays I enjoy it not as a Batman television show but as a fun comedy. Caesar Romero really made everything so much more enjoyable. The man is full of charisma. You can tell he had so much fun playing the Joker. I wouldn't align him with Hamill, Nicholson and Ledger. Part of that is the occasional campy moments such as the time he went surfing with Batman. However he was a pretty damn good Joker but on a different level. As for Adam West, I was never a fan of his Batman but the 60's was a different time.

[Knight Rise]

Yeah, Conroy showed you don't have to sound like you have lung cancer to be intimidating. This thread isn't "Who is best Joker?" it's who had your favorite combination in which so far, besides Meddle, all Ive heard from all of you, even me I know, about Joker.

[IndyJokerJones]

Yeah, Conroy showed you don't have to sound like you have lung cancer to be intimidating.

He's a voice actor, it's kinda his job to do that.

This thread isn't "Who is best Joker?" it's who had your favorite combination in which so far, besides Meddle, all Ive heard from all of you, even me I know, about Joker.

But he's half of the equation of "Batman+Joker=Feel". I discussed both in my post and you're just condemning anyone who doesn't express an opinion you like.

[The Joker]

you're just condemning anyone who doesn't express an opinion you like.

Glad I'm not the only one who's noticed that.

[Knight Rise]

No but when you say "is better than" such and such, you clearly are making it sound like a fact which irritates me because in the end, they're all on the same level and its who you favor. No one is the best joker because they're all different. No one IS anything

[The Joker]

You've got no right to tell people what they can and cannot think is better. Especially regarding something as subjective as characterization of a comic book character.

Who do you think you are?

[Knight Rise]

It's different when you say THINK because that's opinionated. IS mean it must be a fact

[The Joker]

It's different when you say THINK because that's opinionated. IS mean it must be a fact

Your hypocrisy astounds me sometimes:

The real Joker has a plan whether it seems like it or not. He can fool people into believing they got him, but he's always one step ahead. If the final step in his plan is ruined, he's not going to expect it to not happen. He would've laughed his ass off until he realized what happen. That's when joker gets angry. Heaths joker didn't bring enough fun to the character, whether you'd like to believe it or not. So does Mark and Jack and Cesar etc. He had the killer part down, but not enough Joker

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=20805471&postcount=52

[Knight Rise]

Yes I realized I miss worded somethings but you're avoiding the fact on everyone except me

[The Joker]

What fact am I avoiding?

[Knight Rise]

Ok. Heath Ledger's Joker was still more terrifying than Mark Hamill's Joker was. Plus, Ledger's Joker did more damage to Bale's Batman in The Dark Knight than Hamill's Joker did to Conroy's Batman in Batman: The Animated Series, The New Batman Adventures, Justice League, Justice League Unlimited TV series (and other affiliated media), and the Batman: Arkham Asylum video game. Only in Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker did he do comparable damage to Batman, and that was in flashback, and he died shortly afterward.

Ledger and Bale. Nailed it.

First off, the whole point of the thread is based on opinions. Second, Ledger's Joker has already killed Rachel Dawes (and several other officials), corrupted Harvey Dent, set in motion a course of events that have cost Harvey Dent his life and Batman his reputation, and he's alive, so that may not be the end of it. Hamill's Joker tortured Tim Drake into giving up Batman's secrets, brainwashed him into being his sidekick, and then got killed by the little Joker Jr. That was most of the damage Hamill's Joker ever did to Conroy's Batman over a course of about 19 or 20 years at this point, while Ledger's Joker did all the aforementioned damage to Bale's Batman in a single film. Quite frankly, when Hamill's Joker dares Conroy's Batman to kill him in Arkham Asylum, there's not very much he has done to deserve it any more than other Batman villains. When Ledger's Joker dared Batman to kill him in The Dark Knight, a part of me really understood why he just might do it, why Bale's Batman might make an exception for him. I can't say that for Hamill's Joker in most of his appearances.



Agreed.

What movie were you watching? Besides, if you look at all of the BtAS episodes exactly how much time do Batman and Joker spend on screen together per episode? Maybe 5 minutes, most of the episode is Joker doing stuff while Batman is trying to find him. Even in Mask of the Phantasm they aren't on screen together until the last 20 minutes.

As for chemistry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohU16OiduUs

None of these were "I think", "I feel", "I thought", or "IMO". this is just saying Heath IS the better Joker and here's some reasons why. No one needs reasons for opinions, only facts.

[The Joker]

None of these were "I think", "I feel", "I thought", or "IMO". this is just saying Heath IS the better Joker and here's some reasons why. No one needs reasons for opinions, only facts.

They don't need to put I think, I feel, or IMO in any of their posts because it's obvious they're speaking from their own perspective. Their own preference.

If they started dictating to others what they can and cannot say or think, like you did, that's when they are out of line.

[Knight Rise]

How is it obvious? Never mind, this is just becoming utter nonsense.

[IndyJokerJones]

When the title of the thread is "Who gave you the best Batman and Joker feel?" it's pretty much a given that the people posting in the thread will be expressing an opinion. Except for you who words every post as if it is fact handed down from God himself.

[Godzilla2014]

Conroy and Hamill.

People are seriously voting for Bale/Ledger? They barely had any chemistry/screen time together.

Yes they are voting for Bale/Ledger, because they did have those things.

You do realize BTAS/TNBA/BB/JLA/JL/etc was supposed to be for kids, right? Of course they couldn't as gruesome as TDK. You can get away with a lot more in live action than you can in animation.

That being said, Hamill's Joker is much more terrifying and a larger threat, imo.

Yes, I realized the DCAU was intended as family material, but that justification doesn't apply to the T-rated video game Batman: Arkham Asylum, where he still paled in comparison in terms of menace to Heath Ledger's Joker. The Dark Knight was not that gruesome, most of the gruesome stuff is off-screen. Heath Ledger's Joker was far more terrifying and a much larger threat to me. Why? Maybe it's because I watched Mark Hamill's Joker as a kid.

What movie were you watching? Besides, if you look at all of the BtAS episodes exactly how much time do Batman and Joker spend on screen together per episode? Maybe 5 minutes, most of the episode is Joker doing stuff while Batman is trying to find him. Even in Mask of the Phantasm they aren't on screen together until the last 20 minutes.

As for chemistry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohU16OiduUs

I agree. Another thing is that, with Mark Hamill's Joker, the stakes were of the generic sort, or people we really didn't know. With Heath Ledger's Joker, we knew exactly who was at stake. Mark Hamill's Joker might assault Gotham City, but Heath Ledger did that, and attacked humanity's belief in morality. In The Dark Knight, Batman and Joker were battling not for the city itself, but its soul. Their battle is a philosophical debate with fists and other weapons.

He's a voice actor, it's kinda his job to do that.



But he's half of the equation of "Batman+Joker=Feel". I discussed both in my post and you're just condemning anyone who doesn't express an opinion you like.

Agreed.

No but when you say "is better than" such and such, you clearly are making it sound like a fact which irritates me because in the end, they're all on the same level and its who you favor. No one is the best joker because they're all different. No one IS anything

No, not really. It is an opinion. "Is better than" implies an evaluative comparison, and nothing more. It doesn't imply a statement as fact or opinion.

You've got no right to tell people what they can and cannot think is better. Especially regarding something as subjective as characterization of a comic book character.

Who do you think you are?

Exactly.

It's different when you say THINK because that's opinionated. IS mean it must be a fact

I disagree.

Your hypocrisy astounds me sometimes:



http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=20805471&postcount=52

I agree.

None of these were "I think", "I feel", "I thought", or "IMO". this is just saying Heath IS the better Joker and here's some reasons why. No one needs reasons for opinions, only facts.

Bullcrap. People often have reasons for their opinions, or there wouldn't be much reason for debate, would there? Also the title of the thread is "Who gave you the best Batman and Joker feel?", not "Who gave the best Batman and Joker feel?". The "you", in this context, implies subjectivity, as in the subjectivity of opinions.

They don't need to put I think, I feel, or IMO in any of their posts because it's obvious they're speaking from their own perspective. Their own preference.

If they started dictating to others what they can and cannot say or think, like you did, that's when they are out of line.

Exactly.

How is it obvious? Never mind, this is just becoming utter nonsense.

The very fact that it the title is "Who gave you the best Batman and Joker feel?" "Feel" as in a feeling, or an opinion.

[Grommers]

I'm really torn between this.

I really feel that TDK as a whole had the relationship down pact.

However, RotJ I felt was a much stronger performance between the two in the flash back scenes, those were truly awe inspiring.

If I was to go as B:TAS and the whole DCAU as a whole, I feel TDK did a better job with the relationship, as I felt some episodes had that relationship even there. It just felt like another villain.

Where as TDK has only one media outlet for those characters (hell, we didn't even get a video game)

Batman AA is another media. Although Conroy and Hamill improved that experience ten fold for me, I feel they nailed the jokers half of the relationship, but didn't nail batmans half of the relationship.

I'm actually surprised nobody has said Adam West and Cesar Romero, I always felt they had chemistry given the era of batman they were in. I dislike the era and I hope it never comes back, but they still nailed there performances as far as I'm concerned.

[Godzilla2014]

I'm really torn between this.

I really feel that TDK as a whole had the relationship down pact.

I agree. I feel that the Batman/Joker relationship in The Dark Knight was much deeper than it was in Batman: The Animated Series, and so I chose TDK.

However, RotJ I felt was a much stronger performance between the two in the flash back scenes, those were truly awe inspiring.

I haven't seen the movie in years, so I'm not sure I can comment on the performances. The hard part about comparing performances is that Heath Ledger was a physical actor playing the character, while Mark Hamill was a voice actor, so it's hard to make a fair comparison other than their voices.

If I was to go as B:TAS and the whole DCAU as a whole, I feel TDK did a better job with the relationship, as I felt some episodes had that relationship even there. It just felt like another villain.

Who felt like another villain?

Where as TDK has only one media outlet for those characters (hell, we didn't even get a video game)

True.

Batman AA is another media. Although Conroy and Hamill improved that experience ten fold for me, I feel they nailed the jokers half of the relationship, but didn't nail batmans half of the relationship.

Care to elaborate on that, especially the last part about how it nailed Joker's half of the relationship, but not Batman's half?

I'm actually surprised nobody has said Adam West and Cesar Romero, I always felt they had chemistry given the era of batman they were in. I dislike the era and I hope it never comes back, but they still nailed there performances as far as I'm concerned.

I haven't seen the series in years, but I do know the overall tone, and I agree that captured the Batman comics of the era.

[Grommers]

Who felt like another villain?
The Joker, in TDK, RotJ, and AA, his prescence was felt. You could tell this guy was more than just a guy..He was insane, chaotic, and well, just down right evil.

Care to elaborate on that, especially the last part about how it nailed Joker's half of the relationship, but not Batman's half?


Constantly you hear Joker's view on whats going on with the bat, and how crazy his plans are. You can listen on thugs talking about the Joker. I never really felt that they were a ying and yang. I never found that I was batman trying to restore order, but i was batman trying to stop the joker. (still fun). Where as in TDK e.g. Batman was trying to establish order in gotham, and he felt by stopping the Joker was the quick solution, and it showed the joker's prescence is much stronger than just his physical form.
In RotJ you could see that despite joker's death the thought and his philosophies lived on. (Both through the Jokerz and Tim Drake).

[Godzilla2014]

The Joker, in TDK, RotJ, and AA, his prescence was felt. You could tell this guy was more than just a guy..He was insane, chaotic, and well, just down right evil.

Agreed.

Constantly you hear Joker's view on whats going on with the bat, and how crazy his plans are. You can listen on thugs talking about the Joker. I never really felt that they were a ying and yang. I never found that I was batman trying to restore order, but i was batman trying to stop the joker. (still fun). Where as in TDK e.g. Batman was trying to establish order in gotham, and he felt by stopping the Joker was the quick solution, and it showed the joker's prescence is much stronger than just his physical form.
In RotJ you could see that despite joker's death the thought and his philosophies lived on. (Both through the Jokerz and Tim Drake).

Agreed. I think that eliminating the Titan subplot (or have someone else behind it or something) would have helped emphasize the "Batman trying to restore order" point.

[Grommers]

Agreed. I think that eliminating the Titan subplot (or have someone else behind it or something) would have helped emphasize the "Batman trying to restore order" point.


Yeah.

I just felt his "big ultimate scheme" was..well lack luster.


But yeah, like I said back to the original topic. Between RotJ and TDK, they are my favourites. For the reasons above. It's really hard to compare the two, two are actors, and two are animated.
But since I have to make a decision I have to go with RotJ for little more than the experience those two have at bringing those characters to life. However, just as much credit to me has to be given to the animators.

[Godzilla2014]

Yeah.

I just felt his "big ultimate scheme" was..well lack luster.


But yeah, like I said back to the original topic. Between RotJ and TDK, they are my favourites. For the reasons above. It's really hard to compare the two, two are actors, and two are animated.
But since I have to make a decision I have to go with RotJ for little more than the experience those two have at bringing those characters to life. However, just as much credit to me has to be given to the animators.

I think the discussion of Batman: Arkham Asylum is as relevant to this topic of discussion as the plot of The Dark Knight. Anyway, I hope that Arkham City allows Hamill's Joker be all about sewing chaos. I have to say that that was an (relative to TDK) flaw with many of Joker's appearances in Batman: The Animated Series; It was more about Batman stopping Joker's schemes than trying to restore order to chaos caused by Joker.

I choose The Dark Knight for it's complex storyline that keeps one thinking about long after the credits finish rolling. I enjoyed the philosophical aspect of it. The damage Joker did to Batman reminded me of an article from IGN comparing DC and Marvel villains, specifically about the DC villains' success rate (http://comics.ign.com/articles/666/666073p6.html).

"Ultimately, villains lose. That's just the way it goes. But in the DCU, the bad guy often comes away with a little piece of the hero's soul. For some it becomes a defining moment. Even though most of the villains may not be a threat to the whole universe or even the world, they truly make a hero's life hell."-IGN Comics feature, DC vs Marvel: The Villains

[IndyJokerJones]

I'm actually surprised nobody has said Adam West and Cesar Romero, I always felt they had chemistry given the era of batman they were in. I dislike the era and I hope it never comes back, but they still nailed there performances as far as I'm concerned.

Absolutely, they and the guys from Brave and the Bold have that Silver Age relationship down perfectly. Like you I just prefer the more modern portrayals.

[Godzilla2014]

Absolutely, they and the guys from Brave and the Bold have that Silver Age relationship down perfectly. Like you I just prefer the more modern portrayals.

Same here.

[Alexander_Knox]

There are three categories out of these choices that, to me, that go beyond simply "bests". They transcend the very nature of Batman vs. The Joker dynamic.

So if I'm going to have to choose, I prefer multiple choice. In order of which they were shown/released,

- Batman and Joker (Batman, Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson)

- Batman and Joker (The Animated Series, Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill)

- Batman and Joker (The Dark Knight, Christian Bale and Heath Ledger)

I would add West and Romero, but they were more singularly iconic. As far as the '66 show goes, I always felt that the characterization and image of Batman and Robin (West and Burt Ward) was much more powerful than the Batman and Joker. Romero Joker, while iconic on his own just seemed like another member of Batman's rouges gallery than Batman's arch nemesis.

With the Keaton, Nicholson, Conroy, Hamill, Bale and Ledger Batman and Joker you really get this sense of conflict and duality. Like a clash of the titans so to speak. When you see them going against one another with the imagery, something just sort of clicks in your head and you "get it".

The six of them gave me the best "feels". I'd go as far as saying better than their comic counterparts.

[The Caped Knight]

As much as I loved TDK and the key scenes featuring Batman and The Joker together by Bale and Ledger . I gotta give this one to Conroy and Hamill. Even though they only supplied the voice of these characters in animation their performances as these two iconic characters is so epic that anytime you get a confrontation between them you know your in for a real treat .

We saw this countless times in various episodes of BTAS and the film Batman Beyond: ROTJ. But in Batman: Arkham Asylum it was brought up to a whole new compiling level of awesomeness

[Godzilla2014]

As much as I loved TDK and the key scenes featuring Batman and The Joker together by Bale and Ledger . I gotta give this one to Conroy and Hamill. Even though they only supplied the voice of these characters in animation their performances as these two iconic characters is so epic that anytime you get a confrontation between them you know your in for a real treat .

We saw this countless times in various episodes of BTAS and the film Batman Beyond: ROTJ. But in Batman: Arkham Asylum it was brought up to a whole new compiling level of awesomeness

I disagree. Maybe it's just the material of Kevin Conroy as Batman and Mark Hamill as Joker I have easily available (Batman: The Animated Series, Volume 1 DVD and Batman: Arkham Asylum) at the moment, but I don't really remember him doing anything on the level of Bale and Ledger in The Dark Knight. In B: TAS, whenever the Joker appeared, he just provided another scheme for Batman to stop. Not much epic there, certainly not to compare to what Heath Ledger's Joker did in The Dark Knight. That was EPIC. More epic than anything Hamill's Joker did.

Could you imagine Mark Hamill's Joker placing the lives of two groups of people in the other's hands, and threatening to kill both of them if neither kills the other, like Heath Ledger's Joker did? If not, I wouldn't blame you, I couldn't either. Mark Hamill was great, but his Joker lacked menace, and in that respect, both Jack Nicholson and Heath Ledger have him beat hands down, if you want to compare his voice over performance in a family cartoon and video game to either live-action performance by an Oscar winner in a PG-13 film.

I (almost, if counting BB:RotJ) never felt that Kevin Conroy's Batman was ever seriously tempted to kill him, like he often is in the comics. Holy ****! Did I just find something in the Nolan series that was more faithful to the comics than B:TAS? I never thought that would happen.
Anyway, I bring that up because that's made the Batman/Joker rivalry interesting to me in the comics: Joker wants to goad Batman into breaking code, but Batman stays true to it and to himself, so he doesn't, in spite of the horrible things he does.

[Spider-Aziz]

Live Action:
Keaton & Nicholson
Bale & Ledger

Vocal:
Kevin Conroy & old Mark Hamill
John Dimaggio made better voice performance than early days Hamill

[Godzilla2014]

Live Action:
Keaton & Nicholson
Bale & Ledger

Vocal:
Kevin Conroy & old Mark Hamill
John Dimaggio made better voice performance than early days Hamill

Are those listed in order of preference?

[Dreads88]

i liked TDK batman and joker but i love BATMAN keaton and nicholson for that time frame the movie was made in 88/89 it was the best not like today where there have been numerous stories of batman and joker, back then im not sure how many stories were told about them so it all goes into who wrote the movie the actors knowledge of the character etc etc but imo and i mean IMO i like keaton and jack the best :)

[Godzilla2014]

i liked TDK batman and joker but i love BATMAN keaton and nicholson for that time frame the movie was made in 88/89 it was the best not like today where there have been numerous stories of batman and joker, back then im not sure how many stories were told about them so it all goes into who wrote the movie the actors knowledge of the character etc etc but imo and i mean IMO i like keaton and jack the best :)

Why are Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson the best in your opinion? Your post is kind of confusing.

[Spider-Aziz]

Are those listed in order of preference?
I'd number them if it was that way

[Alexander_Knox]

Are those listed in order of preference?

Why does that matter? :huh:

Out of the 7 choices those 3 seem to be the most popular and acclaimed.

[Godzilla2014]

Why does that matter? :huh:

Out of the 7 choices those 3 seem to be the most popular and acclaimed.

It doesn't really.

[helloiamben]

...

[Godzilla2014]

The Keaton/Nicholson dynamic all the way.

Any particular reason?

[helloiamben]

...

[The Joker]

Although I like Batman '89, I think it represents the weakest Batman and Joker relationship. To start off they only share one scene together as Batman and Joker. When they do it's just all about Batman being angry at the Joker for killing his parents. Not about any of the other evil Joker has done. That's not the basis for their feud.

We never see Batman trying to track down Joker or hunt for him. We never get a sense of urgency that Batman has to stop him. The smilex plot is defeated all too easily. Batman just hands Vicki a file with all the answers. Quick fix.

[Godzilla2014]

Although I like Batman '89, I think it represents the weakest Batman and Joker relationship. To start off they only share one scene together as Batman and Joker. When they do it's just all about Batman being angry at the Joker for killing his parents. Not about any of the other evil Joker has done. That's not the basis for their feud.

We never see Batman trying to track down Joker or hunt for him. We never get a sense of urgency that Batman has to stop him. The smilex plot is defeated all too easily. Batman just hands Vicki a file with all the answers. Quick fix.

Pretty much. I felt that the dynamic in Batman didn't work very well because Joker has no clue who Batman is. Batman is beating the **** out of him, talking to him about how he killed his parents...and the Joker has no f'in clue what he's talking about. It felt like a half-assed attempt at a personal vendetta in my opinion.
I personally like the idea that Batman and Joker can hate each other so much, when they don't even know the other is, such as in The Dark Knight.

[helloiamben]

...

[Dark Guardian]

Well, the TDK Hyper-Fans are out in force today... (Defending the film with zealous fervor and with little regard for facts, other peoples opinions, or comic book accuracy.)

Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill can't be beat. Not only are they the epitome of their respective characters, but the way those characters have interacted in the countless media they've been performing, has been true to the comics and true to the characters, more-so than any other interpretation.
Watch "The Laughing Fish" or "The Man Who Killed Batman" from BTAS, or for that matter, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, and you get instantly recognizable performances that resonate with everything you've seen in the comics between the two. The minute they're onscreen together the dynamics between them are perfect.

I like some of the scenes of Keaton and Nicholson, but most of the time their two characters were like two trains running full on at each other. They didn't know one another, didn't have much interplay between them, it was just head on conflict, which worked in Batman 1989.

And of course, I still have to give some credit to Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. The real scene that reflects the most of the true characterization for me is the ferry-boat scene. The dynamic struggle between Batman's optimism and Joker's anarchism is not only fascinating, but very iconic.

The rest don't really work for me. The Batman, The Adam West Series, even Under the Red Hood (which I loved for everything but the Joker) and of course the dreaded Brave and the Bold all were pretty lackluster in their portrayals of both characters, much less their interplay.

[helloiamben]

...

[Godzilla2014]

Well, the TDK Hyper-Fans are out in force today... (Defending the film with zealous fervor and with little regard for facts, other peoples opinions, or comic book accuracy.)

Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill can't be beat. Not only are they the epitome of their respective characters, but the way those characters have interacted in the countless media they've been performing, has been true to the comics and true to the characters, more-so than any other interpretation.
Watch "The Laughing Fish" or "The Man Who Killed Batman" from BTAS, or for that matter, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, and you get instantly recognizable performances that resonate with everything you've seen in the comics between the two. The minute they're onscreen together the dynamics between them are perfect.

I like some of the scenes of Keaton and Nicholson, but most of the time their two characters were like two trains running full on at each other. They didn't know one another, didn't have much interplay between them, it was just head on conflict, which worked in Batman 1989.

And of course, I still have to give some credit to Christian Bale and Heath Ledger. The real scene that reflects the most of the true characterization for me is the ferry-boat scene. The dynamic struggle between Batman's optimism and Joker's anarchism is not only fascinating, but very iconic.

The rest don't really work for me. The Batman, The Adam West Series, even Under the Red Hood (which I loved for everything but the Joker) and of course the dreaded Brave and the Bold all were pretty lackluster in their portrayals of both characters, much less their interplay.

I don't appreciate you trying to invalidate the opinions of others by labeling them "TDK hyper-fans".
For me, Christian Bale and Heath Ledger's Batman-Joker dynamic had a lot more depth than Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill did (in most, if not all appearances). The characterization of Batman and Joker's relationship to one another has gone through many different incarnations, and I felt that The Dark Knight captured my favorite one from the comics.

[The Joker]

Pretty much. I felt that the dynamic in Batman didn't work very well because Joker has no clue who Batman is. Batman is beating the **** out of him, talking to him about how he killed his parents...and the Joker has no f'in clue what he's talking about. It felt like a half-assed attempt at a personal vendetta in my opinion.
I personally like the idea that Batman and Joker can hate each other so much, when they don't even know the other is, such as in The Dark Knight.

Exactly.

That doesn't really matter in the context of the story.

Well maybe not to you it doesn't. We're talking about a portrayal of a Batman/Joker feud. So it matters.

It's two men who very much oppose each other.

You can say that about many enemies.

It doesn't take Bruce Wayne dressed as Batman and Jack Napier fully formed into the Joker to establish this.

Yes it does. Since Batman and The Joker are the arch enemies. Not Batman and Jack Napier.

If you want to split hairs though, technically Batman and The Joker share two scenes, the other being at the Museum when Batman busts out the steel gauntlet in the Joker's face.

Wow, how could I have missed that brief 10 second scene.

Silly me :cwink:

1b. Bruce Wayne/Batman (fully established at the start of the film) isn't aware of Jack Napier (only met for the first time). Jack Napier isn't concerned with Batman, he has Grissom, GPD, and Alicia to worry about.

2. The shootout at Axis Chemicals. Batman threatens Jack Napier directly, lifting him up. The conflict begins with Batman being the cause of Jack Napier's death and his resurrection as The Joker.

3. At Vicki's apartment, Bruce blatantly confronts The Joker. In turn, The Joker unknowingly reveals to Bruce that he is indeed the person that took his mother and father's life.

1a. Flashback to Bruce Wayne and Jack Napier, decades before one donned the mask and cape and before the other had a chemical dip. Their first meeting. Jack Napier threatens young Bruce Wayne's life.

4. The final confrontation between Batman and the Joker. They're both fully fleshed out and realized. They both despise who the other is and what they represent.

Two, less important scenes include where they meet each other is outside the courthouse steps where Bruce Wayne sees the Joker's crime and killing spree first hand. The other, at the museum, Batman vs. The Joker as stated above.

I'd say those scenarios depict a very good Batman and Joker feel.

With all due respect I think what you've done here is dress up a feud that is predicated on a convenient contrived back story connection and one confrontation between the two characters. Half of the scenes you listed there is based on the Joker being the killer of the Waynes. Where in comic book lore has Batman's relationship with the Joker been predicated on Joker creating Batman? Or Joker chasing after Batman's girlfriend like some psycho stalker?

How does any of this depict a "very good Batman and Joker feel"? The best element of the their "feud" was Joker getting annoyed at Batman stealing the limelight on TV. That is something that would annoy Joker. But aside from that, any other animosity between them was fabricated for this movie. Joker wants Batman's woman and Joker killed Batman's parents essentially creating Batman. The smylex plot was a side diversion that was given very little attention and defeated all too easily.

Not the Batman and Joker feud I know.

Not exactly. This feud was building up way before Batman discovered that the Joker was responsible.

And yet the only thing addressed in their one and only confrontation is Batman being angry at Joker for killing his parents.

So this so called building feud was inconsequential when it ultimately had no bearing on their actual showdown.

Disregard the third act of the film for a second. Batman has no idea that the Joker is responsible for his parent's death and yet, The Joker is still very much the enemy that he is to Batman in the comics, animated series and other films. He creates crime, he's a threat. Batman can't have this, so The Joker must be subdued.

You just described virtually every Batman villain. A threat, creates crime, must be stopped. They share no confrontations in the second act either for the evil Joker is doing.

It's like it was all filler to lead to the revelation that Joker killed Batman's parents. Basically it was a cheap plot device to make it personal between them. It was included as part of the re-writes of the third act during the writers strike.

Script writer, Sam Hamm, never wanted to include it. He was totally against it.

The basis of their feud is the basis of Batman and the Joker in general. Batman protects, the Joker destroys. Batman is the hero, the Joker, the villain. Most importantly they're exact opposites (see post above). They both sicken each other long before they realize the history they have with one another.

Again you can apply that to virtually any villain. Look at the Penguin in Batman Returns. He wreaks havoc on Gotham with a gang of circus misfits, blowing up buildings and attacking citizens. He tries to murder all of Gotham with army penguins.

I could describe that as Batman protects, Penguin destroys. Batman the hero, Penguin the villain. See how easy it is? You have to go deeper than that to make their relationship unique.

Batman and Joker in Batman '89 basically just wanted to kill each other for creating each other. Again that is not the nature of their feud. Joker didn't create Batman. It adds a whole personal element to their dynamic that feels totally off.

I recall Bruce getting files on Jack Napier after Bruce quickly deduces that Jack Napier and The Joker are the same. That is research to stop an enemy.

No, he deduced that at the courthouse incident. Hence why he asks Alfred to get him the file in the first place to get background info on him. A guy just came back from the dead looking like a clown. I'd want info on him, too.

There is urgency because the Joker is tainting products and killing people. Bruce sees that Napier has had a hand in chemistry and counter acts and foils The Joker's plot. That's what Batman does. He cracks the code and it infuriates the Joker. This eliminates further loss of life.

Where is the urgency? He causally tells Alfred they should go shopping. Then we see one news report that some more people died. Then Batman cracks the whole thing by simply handing Vicki a file.

Where did you feel the huge urgency, fear and danger in this whole smilex scheme?

Later Batman discovers the source of smylex, tracks the Joker down to his location, and bombs the place, thinking he got the Joker. Two birds with one stone. The stone being the Batmobile.

Right. Even though he's foiled the smylex scheme he suddenly feels the urgency to blow the place up and everyone inside.

When is it indicated he just discovered Axis was where they were making it? How did he suddenly realize that? Did he know all along? If so why didn't he just send the Cops to raid the place and shut it down instead of killing everyone?

None of it makes sense.

Well, the TDK Hyper-Fans are out in force today... (Defending the film with zealous fervor and with little regard for facts, other peoples opinions, or comic book accuracy.

Hey instead of making ignorant and insulting blanket statements, why don't you point out what facts and comic book accuracy has been ignored here? Labeling people with a preference for TDK as "hyper fans" is really childish. What is your problem?

Nobody else has sunk to name calling here. Show some respect for your fellow Bat fans.

[Godzilla2014]

Exactly.



Well maybe not to you it doesn't.



You can say that about any enemies.



Oh yes it does. Since Batman and The Joker are the arch enemies. Not Batman and Jack Napier.



Wow, how could I have missed that brief 10 second scene.

Silly me :cwink:



I'd say you're completely wrong. What you're trying to do here is dress up a feud that is predicated on a convenient contrived back story connection and one confrontation between the two characters.

Where in comic book lore has batman's relationship with the Joker been predicated on Joker creating Batman? Or Joker chasing after Batman's girlfriend like some psycho stalker

How does any of this depict a "very good Batman and Joker feel"?



And yet the only thing addressed in their one and only confrontation is Batman being angry at Joker for killing his parents.

So this so called building feud was inconsequential when it ultimately had no bearing on their actual showdown.



You just described virtually every Batman villain. A threat, creates crime, must be stopped. They share no confrontations in the second act either for the evil Joker is doing.

It's like it was all filler to lead to the revelation that Joker killed Batman's parents. Basically it was a cheap plot device to make it personal between them. It was included as part of the re-writes of the third act during the writers strike.

Script writer, Sam Hamm, never wanted to include it. He was totally against it.



Again you can apply that to virtually any villain. Look at the Penguin in Batman Returns. He wreaks havoc on Gotham with a gang of circus misfits. He tries to murder all of Gotham with army penguins.

I could describe that as Batman protects, Penguin destroys. Batman the hero, Penguin the villain. See how easy it is? You have to go deeper than that to make their relationship unique.

Batman and Joker in Batman '89 basically just wanted to kill each other for creating each other. Again that is not the nature of their feud. Joker didn't create Batman. It adds a whole personal element to their dynamic that feels totally off.



No, he deduced that at the courthouse incident. Hence why he asks Alfred to get him the file in the first place to get background info on him. A guy just came back from the dead looking like a clown. I'd want info on him, too.



Where is the urgency? He causally tells Alfred they should go shopping. Then we see one news report that some more people died. Then Batman cracks the whole thing by simply handing Vicki a file.

Where did you feel the huge urgency, fear and danger in this whole smilex scheme?



Right. Even though he's foiled the smylex scheme he suddenly feels the urgency to blow the place up and everyone inside.

When is it indicated he just discovered Axis was where they were making it? How did he suddenly realize that? Did he know all along? If so why didn't he just send the Cops to raid the place and shut it down instead of killing everyone?

None of it makes sense.



Hey instead of making ignorant and insulting blanket statements, why don't you point out what facts and comic book accuracy has been ignored here?

Completely agree. I think that making Batman and Joker's arch-rivalry personal (as in Batman) kind of removes what makes it unique: Neither one knows who the other is, so the context of their arch-rivalry isn't a personal one, but a philosophical debate with fists. They are less so men in this context than they are symbols of opposing ideals. Joker sees Batman not as an enemy to be killed, but an opponent to be convinced.

[helloiamben]

...

[Godzilla2014]

You know, it's funny what the two of you are doing here. It's blatantly obvious.

If anyone in this thread chooses an option other than The Dark Knight (which I absolutely love by the way) you guys come in and either try to question one's view and opinion on their choice or completely contradict them. It's not a healthy debate or discussion, because lets face it the both of you really don't like '89 Batman, Godzilla especially. You hold it with extreme prejudice even if people spill their guts out and make convincing arguments.

Let's have a look at these couple of pages. If anyone has a choice that you don't agree with Godzilla, you question them. If someone simply posts which option they chose, like I had, you come in and ask "why". Judging by your past posts, something tells me that if a member were to simply state that they preferred Bale and Ledger you'd post "agreed", correct?

That's not very fair as far as I'm concerned. This thread is called, "Who gave You the best Batman and Joker feel" it's a choice based entirely on opinion and yet you come in and question people's opinion that have opposing views. You know it, I know it. There's no problem with disagreement but what you're doing around these forums with your "pro-TDK" attitude and patronizing members who don't agree just rubs me the wrong way. Perhaps that's your intent?

I think the pivotal moment is when a few people in this thread mentioned and explained why they loved a few of the choices, one that included Bale Bats and Ledger Joker and you questioned not only the order in which they placed them in but why other choices other than TDK were involved.

Joker, I'm not about to argue with you. These films are all about interpretation. I've seen the back and forth nonsense between you and JamesCameronline and quite frankly I have no time for it. You know how you feel and I know how I feel. It saddens me though how you come in and tear someone's post apart, piece by piece, as if it's some kind of debate. I know that's the nature of message boards but the way you go about it as if what you post is factual, even when others are essentially posting opinions is bullying. Not to the extent of Godzilla here, but you know what I mean. You both strike me as intelligent so there's no question in my mind that this post hits home for you two. Even if one is more extreme than the other.

It's funny how you guys can analysis and find all these wonderful hidden treasures in the Dark Knight but yet you don't allow yourselves to be acquainted with those of '89. You simply disregard it as nothing more than nonsense. I've got to say, you're missing out on not wholeheartedly enjoying both. If you open yourself to '89 it can be just as a rewarding experience as TDK.

I love the Dark Knight, I could analysis it like there was no tomorrow, just like I've done with Batman '89. In fact, I have done it on various boards. But the thread here was how I felt. First I simply stated which dynamic I chose then Godzilla basically called me out suggesting I should give a reason and so I did.

That wasn't a good enough reason apparently (hell he hasn't even acknowledged my posts) so my choice is not legitimate in his eyes.

Whatever. It's an uphill fight with no winner. You can't change someone's views on something. Personally I love and can enjoy all the choices, well three of them anyway. But the thread calls for one and I chose it. Have I made the wrong choice? Apparently I have.

What ever the case may be, there's still no denying that Batman 1989, Batman The Animated Series and the Dark Knight are the three top choices in this poll. The categories are nearly neck and neck. Does it matter in the long run, no of course not.

I ask about people's reasons to learn more about people's tastes and their personal image of Batman and Joker. In truth, both Batman and Joker have been portrayed in a variety of ways, such as those in all of the choices in the poll, all of which are valid. The question is who are Batman and Joker to you (in terms of characterization) and/or how you prefer them to be, and which portrayal best captures that in your opinion.

I love the Burton Batman films, even though I prefer the Nolan Batman films, I do not disallow myself from discovering the hidden treasures within them. I don't (or at least I try not to) blind myself to the opinions of others and the reasons that they have for those opinions, even when I disagree with them.

[The Joker]

You know, it's funny what the two of you are doing here. It's blatantly obvious.

If anyone in this thread chooses an option other than The Dark Knight (which I absolutely love by the way) you guys come in and either try to question one's view and opinion on their choice or completely contradict them.

Oh really. Then show me where I questioned this guy's opinion here: http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=20825709&postcount=23

It's not a healthy debate or discussion, because lets face it the both of you really don't like '89 Batman, Godzilla especially. You hold it with extreme prejudice even if people spill their guts out and make convincing arguments.

So because I find the Batman/Joker dynamic the weakest in that movie that means I dislike it altogether? I happen to love Batman 1989, even though I find a lot of flaws with it. I own it on Blu-Ray. Same with Batman Returns which takes even bigger liberties with the villains than Batman 1989 did.

I love the movies for what they are. As adaptions of the comic book characters I find them very flawed. This thread asks the question about which Batman/Joker feud did you find to be the best. That's how I approached the discussion.

Joker, I'm not about to argue with you. These films are all about interpretation. I've seen the back and forth nonsense between you and JamesCameronline and quite frankly I have no time for it. You know how you feel and I know how I feel. It saddens me though how you come in and tear someone's post apart, piece by piece, as if it's some kind of debate. I know that's the nature of message boards but the way you go about it as if what you post is factual, even when others are essentially posting opinions is bullying. Not to the extent of Godzilla here, but you know what I mean. You both strike me as intelligent so there's no question in my mind that this post hits home for you two. Even if one is more extreme than the other.

No, I don't know what you mean at all. In fact I take offense to your insinuation. If you think I am "bullying" you or anyone then I urge you right now to hit that report button on my posts and summon a moderator because I won't be accused by you or anyone of being a bully.

I have not insulted anyone. I have not made personal comments about anyone. I haven't used fan labels on anyone. I've stuck strictly to the discussion of Batman and Joker.

If this is bullying, then 90% of the Hype should be headed for bansville.

Just because you go around it more, ahem, elegantly doesn't mean that it isn't the same.

Oh yes it does. I don't label fans. It's as moronic as the "Burtonite" and "Nolanite" labels that get thrown around.

You're right I am more elegant. I am respectful. I talk about the subject material and not the fans themselves.

I think "TDK hyper fans" is a bit childish but is it really that far from the truth? Not with you for the most part, you clearly have a well rounded interest in all forms and interpretation of Batman, like I. But with Godzilla here, it's quite obvious that he doesn't appreciate other fans' feelings towards different interpretations and is sort of a dominant, TDK superior character and dismisses them as nothing with value.

I can't speak for Godzilla. But please do not label me as some kind of hyper fan who is on a witch hunt for the Burton fans. Nothing could be further from the truth since I am one myself.


I love all versions of Batman. From Adam West to Nolan. I've got them all:


http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc131/Jokerfan1980/MyBatdvdbluraystuff.jpg

Lest you forget it was YOU who responded directly to my post by stripping it apart and addressing each point I made. My post wasn't aimed at you specifically. It was a general comment made since Batman 1989 was being discussed.

It's not so different. Just because one goes about it seemingly eloquently, doesn't mean it's not as damaging as simply name calling in a mere sentence.

When you call someone out on their feelings and question how they strongly they feel about something it's a bit demoralizing and hurtful. People are essentially saying what someone feels is wrong. That just isn't right to me.

Listen mate, if you took offense to me explaining my perspective on it, then I'll politely say you need to develop a thicker skin. We're discussing some comic book material here. Nothing serious.

I apologize if you felt like my response was some kind of personal attack (although I honestly cannot see how you saw it as that).

[Godzilla2014]

Oh really. Then show me where I questioned this guy's opinion here: http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=20825709&postcount=23



So because I find the Batman/Joker dynamic the weakest in that movie that means I dislike it altogether? I happen to love Batman 1989, even though I find a lot of flaws with it. I own it on Blu-Ray. Same with Batman Returns which takes even bigger liberties with the villains than Batman 1989 did.

I love the movies for what they are. As adaptions of the comic book characters I find them very flawed. This thread asks the question about which Batman/Joker feud did you find to be the best. That's how I approached the discussion.



No, I don't know what you mean at all. In fact I take offense to your insinuation. If you think I am "bullying" you or anyone then I urge you right now to hit that report button on my posts and summon a moderator because I won't be accused by you or anyone of being a bully.

I have not insulted anyone. I have not made personal comments about anyone. I haven't used fan labels on anyone. I've stuck strictly to the discussion of Batman and Joker.

If this is bullying, then 90% of the Hype should be headed for bansville.



Oh yes it does. I don't label fans. It's as moronic as the "Burtonite" and "Nolanite" labels that get thrown around.

You're right I am more elegant. I am respectful. I talk about the subject material and not the fans themselves.



I can't speak for Godzilla. But please do not label me as some kind of hyper fan who is on a witch hunt for the Burton fans. Nothing could be further from the truth since I am one myself.


I love all versions of Batman. From Adam West to Nolan. I've got them all:


http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc131/Jokerfan1980/MyBatdvdbluraystuff.jpg

Lest you forget it was YOU who responded directly to my post by stripping it apart and addressing each point I made. My post wasn't aimed at you specifically. It was a general comment made since Batman 1989 was being discussed.



Listen mate, if you took offense to me explaining my perspective on it, then I'll politely say you need to develop a thicker skin. We're discussing some comic book material here. Nothing serious.

I apologize if you felt like my response was some kind of personal attack (although I honestly cannot see how you saw it as that).

You said it better than I did! :up:

[trodder]

oh this is a toughie, I love almost all the categories in this one. hmm, I chose Michael and Jack just because I felt they had the best chemistry with each other. such a great time in the 80s to see my favorite comicbook characters come to life. My second choice is Christian and Heath, I absolutely love the interrogation scene between the two of them.

[GothamAlleys]

I see threads like these (vs) always spark fires. Anyway..

If I understand correctly then, then the thread is asking which combination gave you the feel most resembling comic books. Well, I got into Batman and grew up with O'Neil and Grant Joker/Batman (meaning late 80s monthly run, not out of regular continuity one shots or graphic novels) and what reflected this relationship most is BTAS first and B89 second. Joker was always that energetic clown and in the comics Ive read he was always trying to kill Batman, so I never got that "we complete each other" thing. Even in Killing Joke hes trying to kill Batman in the end

Anyway, why I pick BTAS? B89 is close but Batman isnt THE Batman I grew up with, the Modern Age Batman since hes based on the earliest Kane version, so one of the two didnt reflect the comic I grew up with, so that leaves BTAS with constantly jumping Joker, playing games on Batman but at the same trying to nail him, depending on the mood and day, hidin in circus related places, having circus themed plans etc. Thats the crazy clown Joker I knew from the comics, and the BTAS Batman is exactly the comic Batman of my time. In B89 only one of 2 reflected the 80s version, so my vote goes to BTAS. Although even tho I was a fan of comics first, I always found the movies more interesting and superior to comics

So thats that if the answer is which duo gave you the same feel as the comic books

[Fudgie]

Christian and Heath.

I never read a comic where Joker hated Batman for creating him or Batman hating Joker for killing his parents.

[sSArkAngelSs]

AS for VISUAL feel, it was Christian Bale as Batman. As for the Batman voice, definitely Kevin Conroy. It just came natural to him. :)

[GothamAlleys]

Christian and Heath.

I never read a comic where Joker hated Batman for creating him

Joker never hated Batman for creating him, not even in the movie. In the movie he just acknowledged it, and in the comics he also always knew its the escape from batman that landed him in the river

or Batman hating Joker for killing his parents.

Theres always first time for everything. I recommend Batman/Dark Joker the Wild by Doug Moench and Kelley Jones in which Joker is the killer of Waynes and, naturally, Batman hating him for it

[Godzilla2014]

I see threads like these (vs) always spark fires. Anyway..

If I understand correctly then, then the thread is asking which combination gave you the feel most resembling comic books. Well, I got into Batman and grew up with O'Neil and Grant Joker/Batman (meaning late 80s monthly run, not out of regular continuity one shots or graphic novels) and what reflected this relationship most is BTAS first and B89 second. Joker was always that energetic clown and in the comics Ive read he was always trying to kill Batman, so I never got that "we complete each other" thing. Even in Killing Joke hes trying to kill Batman in the end

Anyway, why I pick BTAS? B89 is close but Batman isnt THE Batman I grew up with, the Modern Age Batman since hes based on the earliest Kane version, so one of the two didnt reflect the comic I grew up with, so that leaves BTAS with constantly jumping Joker, playing games on Batman but at the same trying to nail him, depending on the mood and day, hidin in circus related places, having circus themed plans etc. Thats the crazy clown Joker I knew from the comics, and the BTAS Batman is exactly the comic Batman of my time. In B89 only one of 2 reflected the 80s version, so my vote goes to BTAS. Although even tho I was a fan of comics first, I always found the movies more interesting and superior to comics

So thats that if the answer is which duo gave you the same feel as the comic books

Great post! Even though I disagree with your opinion, I appreciate that you gave the reasons for your opinions.

[Godzilla2014]

Joker never hated Batman for creating him, not even in the movie. In the movie he just acknowledged it, and in the comics he also always knew its the escape from batman that landed him in the river

Really? Was the "multiple choice past" aspect introduced in The Killing Joke?

Theres always first time for everything. I recommend Batman/Dark Joker the Wild by Doug Moench and Kelley Jones in which Joker is the killer of Waynes and, naturally, Batman hating him for it

Isn't that an Elseworlds book?

[theman]

keaton and nicholson, no question. both were playing the classic versions of each character. bale and ledger were way too modernized and IMO too movie specific.

[GothamAlleys]

Great post! Even though I disagree with your opinion, I appreciate that you gave the reasons for your opinions.

:up:

I also want to point out that as far as reflecting the comics we knew, Bale is naturally the closest one to Modern Age, almost spot on. While Kilmer draws from the years very close to those Bale drew from, I never ever got the sense that hes Batman. He didnt look it (pretty boy and blond and having weird, almost asian eyes) and he was always too soft and too whining. And he was always sad and depressed, never angry. He never got angry in the suit or at least make an expression of being angry, even when confronting Nygma and TwoFace he still sounded and acted like very relaxed and on Valium. I used to call him Mormon Batman. Bale on the other hand is rather normal under the suit as far as thats possible and menacing in the suit with temper outbursts. pretty much the Batman of the late 80s

Really? Was the "multiple choice past" aspect introduced in The Killing Joke?

But that was a lie. I know that because of TDK, theres this popular myth spread around that Joker has ambiguous origins which was never true (not even in the first issues as he simply didnt have origins like every other villain. Villains didnt have origins at first, not until much later). His real name wasnt known but the story about Red Hood falling into chemicals was never ever questioned. It was in 2000s, when comic books went nuts and started retconning every single thing almost year after year that the person behind the hood kept changing, but the chemical story was prevailed. Right after TKJ Joker sits alone remembering his past again, basically recalling the same events that were shown in TKJ. Same happened in O'Neil's "Images" when Batman confronts Joker telling him that he recognizes that hes Red Hood who fell into chemicals. Theres far too many examples to cite, but the best is perhaps to mention that Moore confirmed that Joker lies about not remembering past in TKJ and that the flashback story is true. Moore says he hates contradiction and messing up the continuity so he never wanted to ruin or contradict the 'established Joker origins in '51, he just wrote what wasnt mentioned, which was the character under the red hood mask and his motivations. He also said he wanted to give Joker backstory which would infuse the character with pathos. Not to mention that again, the events shown as flashback in TKJ were recalled by either Joker or Batman many times later. Even more recently there was an issue where Joker found out that his wife didnt die in the accident but was killed so that he wont back out from robbing that factory.

As bizarre as it sounds, I missed Killing Joke and didnt get to read it after years after I got into Batman. I became a regular reader 9 months after the release of TKJ and such talk never really reappared in the regular continuity issues. Joker always tried to kill Batman and vice versa, ALTHOUGH there was an exploration of some kind of a special thing they have between each other in the story Clash of the Symbols

Isn't that an Elseworlds book?

Yup, but still

[The Joker]

Isn't that an Elseworlds book?

Yes, it is. But you can find the Joker wanting to keep Batman around for fun in canon classic tales like The Laughing Fish:

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc131/Jokerfan1980/Perfect.jpg

[Fudgie]

That's a real interesting dynamic they have. Glad Nolan used it in TDK.

[El Payaso]

Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson
Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill
Christian Bale and Heath Ledger

[Godzilla2014]

:up:

I also want to point out that as far as reflecting the comics we knew, Bale is naturally the closest one to Modern Age, almost spot on. While Kilmer draws from the years very close to those Bale drew from, I never ever got the sense that hes Batman. He didnt look it (pretty boy and blond and having weird, almost asian eyes) and he was always too soft and too whining. And he was always sad and depressed, never angry. He never got angry in the suit or at least make an expression of being angry, even when confronting Nygma and TwoFace he still sounded and acted like very relaxed and on Valium. I used to call him Mormon Batman. Bale on the other hand is rather normal under the suit as far as thats possible and menacing in the suit with temper outbursts. pretty much the Batman of the late 80s

Agreed.

But that was a lie. I know that because of TDK, theres this popular myth spread around that Joker has ambiguous origins which was never true (not even in the first issues as he simply didnt have origins like every other villain. Villains didnt have origins at first, not until much later). His real name wasnt known but the story about Red Hood falling into chemicals was never ever questioned. It was in 2000s, when comic books went nuts and started retconning every single thing almost year after year that the person behind the hood kept changing, but the chemical story was prevailed. Right after TKJ Joker sits alone remembering his past again, basically recalling the same events that were shown in TKJ. Same happened in O'Neil's "Images" when Batman confronts Joker telling him that he recognizes that hes Red Hood who fell into chemicals. Theres far too many examples to cite, but the best is perhaps to mention that Moore confirmed that Joker lies about not remembering past in TKJ and that the flashback story is true. Moore says he hates contradiction and messing up the continuity so he never wanted to ruin or contradict the 'established Joker origins in '51, he just wrote what wasnt mentioned, which was the character under the red hood mask and his motivations. He also said he wanted to give Joker backstory which would infuse the character with pathos. Not to mention that again, the events shown as flashback in TKJ were recalled by either Joker or Batman many times later. Even more recently there was an issue where Joker found out that his wife didnt die in the accident but was killed so that he wont back out from robbing that factory.

As bizarre as it sounds, I missed Killing Joke and didnt get to read it after years after I got into Batman. I became a regular reader 9 months after the release of TKJ and such talk never really reappared in the regular continuity issues. Joker always tried to kill Batman and vice versa, ALTHOUGH there was an exploration of some kind of a special thing they have between each other in the story Clash of the Symbols

I knew that, in the original Batman stories, neither the villains nor Batman himself had origins at first. This is why Catwoman has a whole variety of origin stories, from amnesiac flight attendant to prostitute, to having pretended to be either of those things, for example.

I personally read The Killing Joke recently, and I thought it was a great read. I think books like Batman: Year One, The Dark Knight Returns, and The Killing Joke are the Batman books that they grew up with or that have helped define the character for them.

Yup, but still

Then I might as well mention Batman: Two Faces, where Batman IS Joker.

Yes, it is. But you can find the Joker wanting to keep Batman around for fun in canon classic tales like The Laughing Fish:

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc131/Jokerfan1980/Perfect.jpg

Agreed.
Interestingly, I have never read The Laughing Fish. What are the best Joker stories that are available in trade paperback?

That's a real interesting dynamic they have. Glad Nolan used it in TDK.

Completely agreed.

[GothamAlleys]

I knew that, in the original Batman stories, neither the villains nor Batman himself had origins at first. This is why Catwoman has a whole variety of origin stories, from amnesiac flight attendant to prostitute, to having pretended to be either of those things, for example.

Right. NO ONE had origins at first, simply because in the beginning Batman stories were detective one offs, in the style of pulps. Once the stories transitioned into storylines and adventures, recuring villains were explored and given background and the overall full picture


Then I might as well mention Batman: Two Faces, where Batman IS Joker.

And if someone would say they never read a comic book where Batman was Two Face I would recommend this story

[Godzilla2014]

Right. NO ONE had origins at first, simply because in the beginning Batman stories were detective one offs, in the style of pulps. Once the stories transitioned into storylines and adventures, recuring villains were explored and given background and the overall full picture


True. In Joker's case, it has become a part of the character. Ironically enough, in this aspect, Tim Burton departed from the early comics that he was basing his films on, by giving explicit origins to Joker, Catwoman, and Penguin, while Christopher Nolan seems to use "no villain origins" (for the most part), despite his films being based on the modern comics. Am I weird for noticing that?

And if someone would say they never read a comic book where Batman was Two Face I would recommend this story

Batman's not Two-Face, the book is called Two Faces because Batman and Joker are the same person.

[GothamAlleys]

True. In Joker's case, it has become a part of the character.

No it didnt. Only after TDK when Goyer came up with ambiguity about his origins based on his view on The Killing Joke. On ONE sentence out of over 60 years. And yet the writer of Killing Joke confirmed its the real deal and - again - multiple comic books confirmed the story to be true. The origins were untouched for over 50 years, with only addition from Moore. In 2000s DC was retconning tons of stuff over and over again and Joker wasnt exception. This doesnt mean he was ambiguous with origins on pupose. Never was. Goyer misread TKJ and his view spread around like and today everyone takes it as a gospel


Ironically enough, in this aspect, Tim Burton departed from the early comics that he was basing his films on, by giving explicit origins to Joker, Catwoman,

No he didnt. His movies are based on Kane/Finger run, Golden Age. You cant just take a piece of a whole picture and claim it to be something different. Its like taking 2 words out of entire sentence. Its taken things out of context. Golden Age ended in early 50s, the Burton movies represented the 40s and the first years of fifties. Origins given to the character by the creators of those characters. Joker was Red Hood who fell into chemical river. Catwoman was someone who, through trauma caused by an 'accident', released her hidden inner personality and became catwoman


Again, the early stories were pulps. In pulps you have murder mystery , killer and capture. Its a simple detective story. Once It wasnt some kind of design to have ambiguous origins or mysterious origins. It just wasnt that type of a story to have characters with backgrounds. Once villains started reocuring and gain popularity and were there to stay, and once the stories were turned into the type of stories comic books have to this day, the characters werent just images but were fleshed out with more character and backstories like Batman and Robin

and Penguin, while Christopher Nolan seems to use "no villain origins" (for the most part), despite his films being based on the modern comics. Am I weird for noticing that?

And yet in Modern Age everyone always had origins. An the only reason why anyone didnt was because it wasnt that type of a story and it was the beginning. It was late 1930s, comics werent character driven. They were pulps. Ras was given backstory, Scarecrow didnt need one cause he was given motivations instead, Two Face had origins. Only Joker didnt, because Goyer took one bubble from one comic book from a character who even refers to himself as notorious liar and lied about not remembering his origins (again - confirmed in latter issues and by Moore) and blew it into this ambiguity legend



Batman's not Two-Face, the book is called Two Faces because Batman and Joker are the same person.

Oh ok, I misunderstood. I usually dont read Elseworld stories

[Godzilla2014]

No it didnt. Only after TDK when Goyer came up with ambiguity about his origins based on his view on The Killing Joke. On ONE sentence out of over 60 years. And yet the writer of Killing Joke confirmed its the real deal and - again - multiple comic books confirmed the story to be true. The origins were untouched for over 50 years, with only addition from Moore. In 2000s DC was retconning tons of stuff over and over again and Joker wasnt exception. This doesnt mean he was ambiguous with origins on pupose. Never was. Goyer misread TKJ and his view spread around like and today everyone takes it as a gospel

My mistake. I thought that Alan Moore said that the origin he presented in The Killing Joke was meant to be a possible origin.


No he didnt. His movies are based on Kane/Finger run, Golden Age. You cant just take a piece of a whole picture and claim it to be something different. Its like taking 2 words out of entire sentence. Its taken things out of context. Golden Age ended in early 50s, the Burton movies represented the 40s and the first years of fifties. Origins given to the character by the creators of those characters. Joker was Red Hood who fell into chemical river. Catwoman was someone who, through trauma caused by an 'accident', released her hidden inner personality and became catwoman


Again, the early stories were pulps. In pulps you have murder mystery , killer and capture. Its a simple detective story. Once It wasnt some kind of design to have ambiguous origins or mysterious origins. It just wasnt that type of a story to have characters with backgrounds. Once villains started reocuring and gain popularity and were there to stay, and once the stories were turned into the type of stories comic books have to this day, the characters werent just images but were fleshed out with more character and backstories like Batman and Robin

I know. I was saying that Burton shows the villains' origins (except for Penguin), unlike their first appearances in the Golden Age comics.

And yet in Modern Age everyone always had origins. An the only reason why anyone didnt was because it wasnt that type of a story and it was the beginning. It was late 1930s, comics werent character driven. They were pulps. Ras was given backstory, Scarecrow didnt need one cause he was given motivations instead, Two Face had origins. Only Joker didnt, because Goyer took one bubble from one comic book from a character who even refers to himself as notorious liar and lied about not remembering his origins (again - confirmed in latter issues and by Moore) and blew it into this ambiguity legend


With the exception of Two Face, we did not see the villains' origins onscreen in the Nolan films.


Oh ok, I misunderstood. I usually dont read Elseworld stories

Perfectly understandable.

[GothamAlleys]

With the exception of Two Face, we did not see the villains' origins onscreen in the Nolan films.

We didnt but we knew them. My point in all this is that none of them had mysterius or ambigious origins, only Joker. Now, its a misunderstanding on Goyer's part but hey, pretty good one. Not knowing even where he came from and why he is who he is worked perfectly for TDK, so Im definitely not knocking it. Im just saying it was never like that in comics, despite the popular myth and whether it was great or not

[Godzilla2014]

We didnt but we knew them. My point in all this is that none of them had mysterius or ambigious origins, only Joker. Now, its a misunderstanding on Goyer's part but hey, pretty good one. Not knowing even where he came from and why he is who he is worked perfectly for TDK, so Im definitely not knocking it. Im just saying it was never like that in comics, despite the popular myth and whether it was great or not

Oh, ok. That makes sense.

[November Rain]

Conroy and Hamill. Hands down! Batman Arkham Asylum wouldn't have been near as good without those two voicing. And imo that's the best portrayal of Batman and Joker I've ever seen.

this...times infinity....

and purely for the laughing bat, i'll give it to the guys from the batman, that episode is incredible.

[GothamAlleys]

Overview of the Batman/Joker relationship - http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/2011/08/batmanjoker-relationship-on-paper-and.html

[psylockolussus]

I have yet to have a favorite Batman film.

The first four Batman films didn't have the same actor for Batman.

Then the last two films are overrated and I didn't really enjoy them.